Nuances of benchmarking agent-based and equation-based models of an oil refinery supply chain

K. V. Dam, A. Adhitya, R. Srinivasan, Z. Lukszo
{"title":"Nuances of benchmarking agent-based and equation-based models of an oil refinery supply chain","authors":"K. V. Dam, A. Adhitya, R. Srinivasan, Z. Lukszo","doi":"10.1109/INFRA.2008.5439574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Benchmarking is not only about making comparisons but, through these, learning lessons to improve actual performance or knowledge. Comparing modelling paradigms based only on the conceptual model specifications is not enough; rather a well-defined benchmarking process and the execution of experiments are required. A benchmarking strategy is applied to three models of an oil refinery supply chain, using the agent-based or equation-based paradigm. Despite the different paradigms, the models share the same assumptions and model boundaries and an attempt is made to provide same initial conditions and stochastics. The benchmarking process shows that clear definitions of the modelling paradigms are needed to avoid confusion and to enable mining of specific and guiding conclusions from the benchmarking studies. Agent-based models and equation-based models rely on different modelling attributes: The first are mostly identified by the model elements (i.e. individuals) while the latter are mostly identified by the system description elements (i.e. equations). We present a way to visualize this and to add nuance to the choice of labels to allow for the conclusions of the benchmarking study to be generalised beyond the models that are compared, to learn about the advantages and shortcomings of modelling paradigms. Finally, some misconceptions regarding agent-based modelling are identified. The lessons learnt apply to supply chain domain but are extensible to other domains.","PeriodicalId":207041,"journal":{"name":"2008 First International Conference on Infrastructure Systems and Services: Building Networks for a Brighter Future (INFRA)","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2008 First International Conference on Infrastructure Systems and Services: Building Networks for a Brighter Future (INFRA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/INFRA.2008.5439574","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Benchmarking is not only about making comparisons but, through these, learning lessons to improve actual performance or knowledge. Comparing modelling paradigms based only on the conceptual model specifications is not enough; rather a well-defined benchmarking process and the execution of experiments are required. A benchmarking strategy is applied to three models of an oil refinery supply chain, using the agent-based or equation-based paradigm. Despite the different paradigms, the models share the same assumptions and model boundaries and an attempt is made to provide same initial conditions and stochastics. The benchmarking process shows that clear definitions of the modelling paradigms are needed to avoid confusion and to enable mining of specific and guiding conclusions from the benchmarking studies. Agent-based models and equation-based models rely on different modelling attributes: The first are mostly identified by the model elements (i.e. individuals) while the latter are mostly identified by the system description elements (i.e. equations). We present a way to visualize this and to add nuance to the choice of labels to allow for the conclusions of the benchmarking study to be generalised beyond the models that are compared, to learn about the advantages and shortcomings of modelling paradigms. Finally, some misconceptions regarding agent-based modelling are identified. The lessons learnt apply to supply chain domain but are extensible to other domains.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
炼油厂供应链中基于代理和基于方程的基准模型的细微差别
标杆管理不仅仅是进行比较,而是通过比较,吸取教训来提高实际表现或知识。仅基于概念模型规范比较建模范式是不够的;相反,需要一个定义良好的基准测试过程和实验的执行。使用基于代理或基于方程的范式,将基准策略应用于炼油厂供应链的三个模型。尽管范式不同,但模型共享相同的假设和模型边界,并试图提供相同的初始条件和随机性。基准测试过程表明,需要对建模范式进行明确定义,以避免混淆,并能够从基准测试研究中挖掘具体和指导性的结论。基于agent的模型和基于方程的模型依赖于不同的建模属性:前者主要由模型元素(即个体)识别,而后者主要由系统描述元素(即方程)识别。我们提出了一种方法来可视化这一点,并在标签的选择中添加细微差别,以便将基准研究的结论推广到所比较的模型之外,以了解建模范式的优点和缺点。最后,指出了一些关于基于智能体的建模的误解。吸取的经验教训适用于供应链领域,但可以扩展到其他领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Asset management stewardship: The effectiveness of public-private mix governance structures Developing robust Intelligent Speed Adaptation policies within a multi-stakeholder context: An application of exploratory modeling Agent coordination for supply and demand match in microgrids with auction mechanism Anticipation for efficient electricity transmission network investments Implementation of cross-border balancing in Europe
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1